Occam's Coffeehouse for 11/23/09

[Jason Grosser]

For next week, Brad had the following idea for our Occam's Coffeehouse discussion, which I like.

Location: Newk's on Germantown Parkway
Time: 6:30 pm 
Date: Monday, 11/23/09

Jason 

THE CREATION / EVOLUTION CONTROVERSY: THE RHETORIC OF THE DEBATE

The 'Creation / Evolution Debate' itself is old hat to many Occamites of both Christian and atheist-agnostic persuasions. And by now, the debate itself is no longer interesting, certainly no lunger unsettled, for quite a few of us. Take me (Brad), for example: A confirmed Christian, I'm also 100% content with an ancient earth, with modern biology and palaeontology, at ease with my genetic kindredness to all the inmates of the Memphis zoo, and I stand a favourite portrait of Darwin on the very bookcase where I keep my bibles, concordances, et al. Some Christians of my acquaintance, however, are surprised to find anyone they know buys an evolutionary perspective, and are shocked to find Christians who buy it. No one, it seems, really persuades anyone. That said, the rhetoric of the debate remains interesting to me. Why, I wonder, does it seem to spark rather more heat than light? Throughout much of the world, it's a perfectly ordinary thing for someone to be, say, an agnostic and an evolutionist, or a Christian and an evolutionist. Here in the USA, however, battle lines are drawn, and the moral fate of our nation hangs, we're told, on issues of geology, geophysics, palaeontology, etc. Why, I wonder, is so much vitriol, so much verbal violence, slung about in this debate?

 

The Christian, certainly the Christian creationist, we're told by Dawkins, is "deluded." Says felonious creationist Kent Hovind, our geologists and palaeontologists et al are not just "morons" but "morons with an agenda." There's a lot of blood spilled on this battlefield, but it's less than clear to what extent either side is winning any ground. Why all this--for lack of a better word--nastiness?

 

Here's where I propose we start...

 

1.  For next week, I'll prepare a basic, brief discussion document, including some comments from the (to many) strange middleground of an evolutionist who's a Christian. I'll make a short presentation, then try my best to facilitate discussion in the ratyher nice manner Dale did a couple of weeeks back re: art and aesthetics.

 

2.  I'll bring three one-page samples, copies for everyone, of writing in the evolution / creation arena...first: a sample of what I think a rhetorically sound and reasonably mannered writing pro-evolution...second: a sampler of rhetorically BAD (and vicious) writing on the creationist side...and then, third, the thing most of us have trouble doing: a sample of a GOOD, well written piece advancing the creationist position I'm opposed to.

 

Here's the idea...It's easy for me, as an evolutionist, to find a GOOD piece of evolutionist work and stack it up against an embarrassingly BAD piece for the opposition. But that's "wimpery" on my part--in so doing, I'm arguing against a straw man, pulling the legs off a spider. What we're often not as willing to do as we should be--I'm GUILTY!--is to deal with our opposition's STRONGEST soldier.

 

I seek here as well to find common ground. My agnostic buddies will forgive my invoking the story of Paul at the Areopagus (Acts 17:22ff), which might serve as a model for us all. "Seek first to understand." I too often have, in my head and heart, and a little too often in my mouth, labelled Young Earth Creationists as "dummies," "rubes" and the like, when such labels are not (or not always) quite true...not kind...and (forgive this, Jason!) un-Christian.

 

I challenge Occamites of every stripe to bring samples similar in spirit and to be ready for an interesting discussion. Once again, our aim is NOT to rehash the debate per se. Don't want to hear about potassium-argon dating or the Paluxy mantracks or why the Burgess Shale or Christ's endorsement of the Old Testament "proves" this or that. Rather, this is a META-discussion...a discussion ABOUT the debate.

 

It's a discussion which, I hope, will bring an even higher standard of listening, of willingness to understand. I hope it will be a model of what Occam's ought to be all about.

Cheers,
Brad

 

---

Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now.